Michael Moore Says Doc umentary Already Has HMOs Spooked

From The Nation:

SiCKO Is Boffo


In 1971, Edgar Kaiser, the son of the founder of Kaiser Permanente, one of the first big HMOs, went to see John Ehrlichman, a top aide to President Nixon, to lobby the Nixon White House to pass legislation that would expand the market for health maintenance organizations (HMOs). Ehrlichman reported this conversation to Nixon on February 17, 1971. The discussion, which was taped, went like this:

Ehrlichman: I had Edgar Kaiser come in...talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because the less care they give them, the more money they make.

President Nixon: Fine.

The next day, Nixon publicly announced he would be pushing legislation that would provide Americans "the finest health care in the world."

When tapes of the Nixon-Ehrlichman conversation and Nixon's subsequent public statement are played halfway through Michael Moore's new movie SiCKO, it is one of the film's more revealing moments. By this point in the film, Moore has already demonstrated that health insurance companies and HMOs are parasitic villains that routinely deny necessary medical care to make more bucks--even when their money-grubbing leads to the death of patients. Looking for the original sin that led to the present mess, Moore zeroes in on this Nixonian moment, which encapsulates the film's premise that the United States health care system is defined by a fundamental conflict: profit versus care, and--no surprise--profit beats care.

Moore makes this point magnificently in SiCKO, which is the best film in the Moore canon. I say this as one who had a mixed reaction to Fahrenheit 9/11. (See here.) This time around, Moore has crafted a tour de force that his enemies will have a tough time blasting (though they will still try). It's not as tendentious as his earlier works. It posits no conspiracy theories. The film skillfully blends straight comedy, black humor, tragedy, and advocacy. You laugh, you cry--literally. And you get mad.

The film stitches together a string of health care horror stories. Moore opens the movie by looking at two cases involving Americans who don't have health insurance. One fellow who sliced off the tips of two fingers is told at the hospital that he can attach the ring finger for $12,000 and the middle finger for $60,000. He can't afford both. Ever the romantic, Moore reports, this man opts to save his ring finger.

But SiCKO is not about the uninsured. It's about those who have insurance and who have been screwed. Moore began this project by advertising on the Web for tales of health care woe. Within a week, he had received 25,000 emails. That's plenty of raw material. One enterprising father of a child who was going deaf and whose insurance company would only pay for one ear implant wrote his insurance firm and asked if its CEOs would like to appear in Moore's film. The company--whaddayaknow--quickly authorized payment for the other implant.

From this flood of complaints, Moore drew compelling and heartbreaking stories. A woman is denied payment for a major procedure because she neglected to mention on her insurance application that she once had a yeast infection (which was, of course, unrelated to the procedure she needed). A mother loses her 18-month-old daughter because a hospital won't treat her without authorization from her insurance company and her insurer insists she takes the child (during an emergency situation) to an in-network hospital. A woman who was in a car crash is denied payment for an ambulance trip because she did not receive pre-approval for that cost. A man is denied a bone-marrow transplant that could save his life and dies.

Moore interviews health care industry insiders who confirm the worst suspicions. A former employee at a health insurance sales centers cries as she talks about how she was trained to handle prospective clients who might be health risks. "I'm such a bitch on the phone," she says. Doctors who worked for health care companies tell how they were encouraged to deny claims to save their companies money. Medical reviewers for one health insurance company who rendered the most denials received bonuses. Footage from a video surveillance camera shows a Los Angeles hospital dumping an indigent patient on Skid Row. "Who are we?" Moore asks. "Is this what we have become: a nation that dumps its own citizens?"

Moore's meta-message is, It doesn't have to be this way. He visits Canada, England, and France and compares their health care delivery systems to America's. He plays this for loads of yucks. In a British hospital, he goes looking for the place where a patient has to pay his or her bill. He cannot find such a check-out counter. Then--a-ha!--he finds a cashier. But--here comes the punch line--this is where the hospital hands out cash to patients who need a few pounds to cover the cost of their transportation home. Yes, in a British hospital you can leave with more money than you came in with.

What about those put-upon doctors who must work under the heavy yoke of Britain's National Health Service? He interviews a young doctor who drives a new Audi and lives in a posh million-dollar flat. The British system, the doc says, is fine for doctors--unless you want to live in a $3 million flat and own three or four cars. As for drugs, every prescription in England costs the equivalent of ten bucks--no matter what drug or how much of it. An American who blew out his shoulder trying to walk across the famous intersection at Abbey Road on his hands tells Moore that he obtained great hospital care for no money.

Ditto Canada. Ditto France. Doing his I-can't-believe-it act, Moore grills Americans and locals in each country who relate stories of receiving quality care for no payments. A Canadian doctor, with a straight face, says that he has "never told anyone we couldn't put a finger back on" because of a patient's inability to pay. In the land of surrender-monkeys, Moore discovers that government-paid doctors--Sacre bleu!--make house calls, and new parents are visited by federally-paid daycare providers. And get this: a fellow who completes chemo in France gets three months of paid leave to recuperate (on a beach in the south of France, no less). No wonder, the United States ranks 37th in the world when it comes to the health of its citizens, just edging out Slovenia.

Moore whacks the U.S. political system for catering to the needs of the insurance industry not the citizenry, pointing out that the health care lobby pumps millions of dollars into the campaigns of lawmakers. He notes that Senator Hillary Clinton ☼, once the scourge of the health care industry, has become a top recipient of contributions from health care firms. (Movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, executive producer of the film and a friend of Hillary Clinton, pressed Moore to cut that part of the film. Moore turned him down. In a recent interview, Weinstein conceded he had asked Moore to delete this portion.)

In the film's climax, Moore gets on a boat in Miami with three 9/11 rescue workers who have been unable to obtain the necessary treatment for ailments apparently caused by their exposure to debris at Ground Zero. His mission: bring them and other health care industry victims to the Guatanamo detention facility in Cuba, where (according to the Bush administration and Republican congressional leaders) the detainees typically receive fine medical treatment. Gitmo, Moore cracks, is "the only place on American soil with free universal health care."

Moore's small flotilla approaches the camp. He takes out a bullhorn and shouts, I have three 9/11 rescue workers who need medical attention. He adds, They just want the kind of treatment al Qaeda is getting. No one in the guard tower responds. A siren goes off. Maybe we better leave, he says. Moore takes the rescue workers and the others to the Havana Hospital where they receive--as do all Cubans there--free quality treatment.

Sure, it's a stunt--but a telling one. One of the rescue workers is living on a monthly disability payment of $1000. Her inhaler costs $120, and she needs at least two a month. She breaks down and cries when she learns she can purchase the same drug in Cuba for five cents. Were she a suspected terrorist in Gitmo, she would get the device for free.

Moore's right. The health care system in the United States is a bad deal for many Americans. (Don't get me started about Oxford, which routinely denies almost every claim I submit for my family.) He glosses over some of the problems overseas (the French social welfare system is under much pressure), but he debunks the hyperbolic scare-'em criticisms hurled at the Canadian and British systems by free-marketeers who defend the U.S. system. As for the charge that a universal health care system would be "socialized medicine," Moore rightfully counters that in the United States there's socialism when it comes to the public well-being; there are public schools, public fire departments, and public libraries. What about public health?

In the film, Canadians, Brits and French laugh at Americans for their cockamamie health care system. Explaining their own systems, they all say that it's a matter of communal security: we take care of each other. In other words, leave no citizen behind. Moore does not explicitly call for a particular set of reforms. But he clearly wants a taxpayer-funded system that cuts out the insurance companies and provides universal care to all.

Health care policy can be mind-numbingly complicated. Try to sort out the differences between Senator Barack Obama's health care plan and Senator John Edwards' proposal. And remember the wire chart the GOP cooked up for Hillary Clinton's proposed reform? But Moore, to his credit, cuts through the surface-level details and gets to the essentials. Why not health care for all? Why allow corporate profit-mongers to decide whether an 18-month-old girl lives or dies? Why is the population of the United States, as wealthy as this nation is, not as healthy as the population of Britain, France, Canada, and 33 other countries? Why settle for a sick system?

Advocates of universal health care (note I say care, not coverage) are hoping SiCKO leads to political change. The California Nurses Association, which supports a single-payer system, is organizing across the country in conjunction with the movie's appearance. It's hard to see a film moving a nation--and, in particular, the politicians who pocket all those health care industry dollars. But Moore has produced a work that maximizes his talents as social critic, humorist, filmmaker, journalist, and advocate. SiCKO is brilliantly funny and sad. It's a dead-on diagnosis. Don't get sick before seeing this film.

I appreciate this thread -thanks for doing it

I just went through a bout that has lasted for several months with my HMO about an $18.00 double charge for my monthly dental and vision program. I finally got a customer service gal who was very helpful and a check is coming but I did jokingly said I had considered sicking Michael Moore on them and she laughed like hell.

The issue is, to me, the comparison between an IMPERFECT not-for-profit system in which everyone is insured and companies do not almost automatically deny claims at first so that they can hold onto their market-earning money as long as possible and an IMPERFECT for-profit system in which many people are either not insured or underinsured and where the system's principal purpose is profit rather than service.

The criticism of Moore's thesis in terms of its imperfections (occasional sloppy facts) truly annoys me. It represents an effort to cloud the important truths he advances regarding the horrors of the present system.

I don't think it's sloppy facts -- you can find everything on screen as one interpretation of statistical facts, naturally. Of course, he doesn't address those who have good insurance coverage and have good things to say about their experience in doctor's offices and hospitals. I've never run into many that have not found flaws in the system and of their individual treatment. I have a long-term female friend who is dying of cancer -- she's recently had very bad experiences in hospitals even with good coverage and choose to waive any radiation treatment and live out the few months left the best that she can.

He's been called on the final scenes in the film as a stunt and came up with some reasonable, rational answers, especially on Leno this week.

From MM's site:


An Awesome First Night for "Sicko"

Saturday, June 30th, 2007

Friends,

Thank you so much to the hundreds of thousands of you who went to see my movie last night and this afternoon. The studio tells me that we are on track to have the second largest opening weekend for a documentary in the history of the movies! ("Fahrenheit 9/11" was first.) Many theaters have been selling out. The Bush administration's investigation of this movie is certainly not keeping people away. Thanks for all the pictures you sent me of people packing in to see "Sicko!"

The movie is making impact big and small. I thought you would enjoy this story about a family that Aetna was forcing to pay a $65,000 hospital bill that the insurance company was supposed to cover! Check it out.

The critics, too, have been more than kind. Can I show you what a few of them said?

"It's as uplifting and heart-rending a thing as you will see at the movies all year. And it speaks of Moore's enduring faith -- his angry, nettled, exasperated belief that 'despite all our differences, we sink or swim together.' " -- Amy Biancolli, Houston Chronicle

"The weight of evidence Moore marshals for taking the profit motive out of medicine is overwhelming. In a summer of dumb, shameless drivel, Moore delivers a movie of robust mind and heart. You'll laugh till it hurts." -- Peter Travers, Rolling Stone

"'Sicko' is a beyond brilliant, nonpartisan expose' on American politics that should be mandatory for every student in America. Some rich person -- like maybe Angelina Jolie -- should sponsor a program where DVDs are sent to families or free screenings are held at local churches." -- Caroline Kepnes, E!

For more of this, click here.

There's a moment in "Sicko" when the former British MP, Tony Benn, says, "If we have the money to kill people (with war), we've got the money to help people." That line always gets the loudest applause in the theater. It is estimated that, before Bush's War is over, we will have spent two trillion dollars on it. Let me say this: I NEVER want to hear again from ANY politician that we "don't have the money" to fix our schools, to take care of the poor, to provide health care for every American. Clearly, the money IS there when we want to illegally invade another country and then prolong a disastrous occupation. From now on, we have to demand that our tax dollars be there for the things we need, not the things that make us one of the most detested countries on earth.

If you haven't seen "Sicko," go see it tonight. I want this film to have as much impact as it can. How well it does in terms of attendance this first weekend will determine how many other towns get to see it. It's all about the "first weekend box office" with the studios these days. If it does well in the 400 theaters it's in, they will put it in more theaters next weekend. And trust me, the White House and their friends in the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries know this, too. It's no surprise to me that an original master of "Sicko" was stolen and widely distributed on the internet before the film's release. I'm one of the few people in the movie business who doesn't believe in prosecuting teenagers who want to share music or films (although I make my movies to be seen on a big screen and that's how I hope people see them!). I called up Mr. Bush's FBI last week. I wanted to know if they had asked themselves the first question any cop would ask about this particularly un

"Who has a vested interest in destroying the first weekend of Michael Moore's new film by stealing his movie's master copy and placing it on the internet?"

Needless to say, they showed little interest in investigating who's behind this. That's ok. I realize what's at stake for them and I accept that this is a battle with serious consequences. The drug and insurance companies have dumped over a half billion dollars in the pockets of Congress and the White House in the last 10 years. This movie may end up being their worst nightmare.

But here's the good news: There's more of us than there are of them. So, it's up to the rest of you to help me help this movie have a great opening weekend. If over a half million people come out to see it by tomorrow night, the studio will take that to mean it should be in more cities and more theaters. Let's make that happen. And I promise you, if you go, you'll see a movie unlike any other you've seen this year. Last night, the industry polled the people coming out of "Sicko." 93% said they would "strongly recommend 'Sicko'" to their friends and family. The pollster said he'd never seen a number that high (the norm for most movies is about 45%). It was a heartening piece of news.

Thanks again and see ya tonight at the movies!

Yours,
Michael Moore

Numbers cited in "Sicko" are accurate for the most
Sat June 30, 2007
Analysis: Numbers cited in "Sicko" are accurate for the most part
By A. Chris Gajilan

Assertions could use more context to flesh out comparisons of health care
Health-care experts focus more on film's errors of omission than incorrect facts


(CNN) -- Michael Moore's "Sicko," which opened nationwide Friday, is filled with horror stories of people who are deprived of medical service because they can't afford it or haven't been able to navigate the murky waters of managed care in the United States.

A couple featured in Michael Moore's "Sicko" leave a London hospital with their newborn.

It compares American health care with the universal coverage systems in Canada, France, the United Kingdom and Cuba.

Moore covers a lot of ground. Our team investigated some of the claims put forth in his film. We found that his numbers were mostly right, but his arguments could use a little more context. As we dug deep to uncover the numbers, we found surprisingly few inaccuracies in the film. In fact, most pundits or health-care experts we spoke to spent more time on errors of omission rather than disputing the actual claims in the film.

Whether it's dollars spent, group coverage or Medicaid income cutoffs, health care goes hand in hand with numbers. Moore opens his film by giving these statistics, "Fifty million uninsured Americans ... 18,000 people die because they are uninsured."

For the most part, that's true. The latest numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say 43.6 million, or about 15 percent of Americans, were uninsured in 2006. For the past five years, the overall count has fluctuated between 41 million and 44 million people. According to the Institute of Medicine, 18,000 people do die each year mainly because they are less likely to receive screening and preventive care for chronic diseases.

Moore says that the U.S. spends more of its gross domestic product on health care than any other country.

Again, that's true. The United States spends more than 15 percent of its GDP on health care -- no other nation even comes close to that number. France spends about 11 percent, and Canadians spend 10 percent.

Like Moore, we also found that more money does not equal better care. Both the French and Canadian systems rank in the Top 10 of the world's best health-care systems, according to the World Health Organization. The United States comes in at No. 37. The rankings are based on general health of the population, access, patient satisfaction and how the care's paid for.

So, if Americans are paying so much and they're not getting as good or as much care, where is all the money going? "Overhead for most private health insurance plans range between 10 percent to 30 percent," says Deloitte health-care analyst Paul Keckley. Overhead includes profit and administrative costs.

"Compare that to Medicare, which only has an overhead rate of 1 percent. Medicare is an extremely efficient health-care delivery system," says Mark Meaney, a health-care ethicist for the National Institute for Patient Rights.

Moore spends about half his film detailing the wonders and the benefits of the government-funded universal health-care systems in Canada, France, Cuba and the United Kingdom. He shows calm, content people in waiting rooms and people getting care in hospitals hassle free. People laugh and smile as he asks about billing departments and cost of stay.

Not surprisingly, it's not that simple. In most other countries, there are quotas and planned waiting times. Everyone does have access to basic levels of care. That care plan is formulated by teams of government physicians and officials who determine what's to be included in the universal basic coverage and how a specific condition is treated. If you want treatment outside of that standard plan, then you have to pay for it yourself.

"In most developed health systems in the world, 15 percent to 20 percent of the population buys medical services outside of the system of care run by the government. They do it through supplemental insurance, or they buy services out of pocket," Keckley says.

The people who pay more tend to be in the upper income or have special, more complicated conditions.

Moore focuses on the private insurance companies and makes no mention of the U.S. government-funded health-care systems such as Medicare, Medicaid, the State Children's Health Insurance Program and the Veterans Affairs health-care systems. About 50 percent of all health-care dollars spent in the United States flows through these government systems.

"Sicko" also ignores a handful of good things about the American system. Believe it or not, the United States does rank highest in the patient satisfaction category. Americans do have shorter wait times than everyone but Germans when it comes to nonemergency elective surgery such as hip replacements, cataract removal or knee repair.

That's no surprise given the number of U.S. specialists. In U.S. medical schools, students training to become primary-care physicians have dwindled to 10 percent. The overwhelming majority choose far more profitable specialties in the medical field. In other countries, more than one out of three aspiring doctors chooses primary care in part because there's less of an income gap with specialists. In those nations, becoming a specialist means making 30 percent more than a primary-care physician. In the United States, the gap is around 300 percent, according to Keckley.

As Americans continue to spend $2 trillion a year on health care, everyone agrees on one point: Things need to change, and it will take more than a movie to figure out how to get there.

Gajilan reports that "'Sicko'...ignores a handful of good things about the American system. Believe it or not, the United States does rank highest in the patient satisfaction category."

But "Patient Satisfaction" is scored for those who actually received care. What about those who did not or cannot receive treatment because of lack of insurance?

video
I cheered as Michael Moore made toast out of CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/07/09/michael-moore-blasts-blit_n_55512.html

Part 2
Tuesday, July 10th, 2007

Today, Michael Moore will be on CNN again for Part Two with Wolf Blitzer, (Did you see Part One? And our response?), a new appearance on Larry King Live with Dr. Sanjay Gupta (appearing, we assume, to apologize for his factual errors), and a rerun of Mike's appearance on Jon Stewart from 13 days ago.

Those of us who maintain Michael's website have started a truth squad. Watch for our daily reports on how the media lies, distorts and carries the water for Big Pharma and Big Insurance.

We'll leave you with this analysis of how the mainstream media deals with Michael Moore.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=10019

Thanks!

Webmaster
MichaelMoore.com

I didn't see Moore on the Situation Room live yesterday but will definitely tune in today. Also, I'm sure you saw it but over on michaelmoore.com the Sicko Truth Squad has a great rebuttal to CNN's attacks,



There is more. Thanks for the heads up about part 2 of the "interview."

Michael Moore| BIO
Michael Moore Exclusive HuffPost Live Chat
Posted July 10, 2007 | 09:30 PM (EST)

Hey everybody. Welcome to the webchat. Michael is just getting out of Larry King Live and will be with you shortly. Sorry for the delay. Thanks so much.

Michelle in Phoenix, AZ: In regard to the statement Dr. Sanjay Gupta made if the American people of this country would rather be in Canada or in the US awaiting a specific heart procedure, would that be if I was Insured or Uninsured? Because if I was uninsured I certainly would not want to be in the US because I know I would be DEAD without insurance! At least in Canada being placed on a waiting list I would have a fighting chance to Survive! THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. MOORE !

Michael Moore: As Americans, we should never have to answer such a ridiculous question. We live in the richest country on earth. Each citizen should be able to see a doctor on time, and not have to worry about paying for it.

Calvin: would healthcare for children up to the age of 18 be a good way to get the ball rolling? preventative medicine in those early years would catch a lot of stuff that would end up costing a lot to fix and possibly even killing the person. find out what works and then apply it to adults later. and who could be against healthcare for kids? it's a campaign killer.

MM: What good does it do to cover kids when the parents get sick and can't get help? Sick parents can't take care of well kids.

Jonathan in Los Angeles: I would like to ask Mr. Moore... Have you ever thought about running for president?

MM: No. I would like to live.

Michelle in Manchester, NH: What can we do to move this from a fact-check argument to a real discussion about healthcare? Why do you think we cannot seem to move past this?

MM: I can start by refusing to have any more of distracting discussions on these shows like that, which are designed to keep me from talking about the real issues. The opposition has always thrown that at me. But now, thanks to the Internet, we can show that it is they who are telling the lies by simply posting the facts and the evidence on my website.

Jeff in Havertown, PA: What do you think the likelihood is that your proposals will be embraced by the politicians, even if they are embraced by the people? We need a Canada style systems desperately, but I'm worried those who are bought will stay
bought.

Thanks for all your efforts Mike, and I miss the hat and beard.

MM: My proposals will be embraced by some politicians (over 70 members of congress now support the universal health care bill HR 676). The rest will get on board when the people demand it.

Jenny: Thanks for bringing attention to this issue. Did Gupta say the only affiliation the "expert" had was to Vanderbilt U. Where can we go to verify this?

MM: Thats what Dr. Gupta said, and unfortunately it wasn't the whole truth.
Here's the real scoop on the only expert he chose to consult in his hit
piece.

Here's his bio page at Deloitte Center for Health Solutions:

Tommy Thompson, former Bush Administration Health and Human Services
Secretary and architect of Medicare Part D, here.

Oh, and he's a big GOP donor.

PJ: Do you think this will change anything as me for no healthcare myself, or will Bush just do what he always wants to do. We put these people in office and they do nothing for us but get richer themselves.

MM: That wasn't the way it used to be. I don't think that's the way Abraham Lincoln behaved, I don't think FDR behaved like that for four terms in the White House. We're just all demoralized by how pathetic recent leadership has been.

Steve in Los Angeles: Michael,

Can you please explain to Dr. Gupta that in the world that most Americans live in, we're not looking for "Health Care Utopia", and having to wait in a doctors office to be seen is something of a luxury many of us can no longer afford. His comment that in countries with free health care there is a long wait-time to see a doctor and it takes months to schedule elective surgery is laughable. That's like telling a starving person "don't bother with the free food, there's a line to get in and service is just awful." Are you joking?

I'm a self employed carpenter with no health insurance. None. I can't afford it. I go to work everyday knowing that one slip of the saw, and I could be choosing my fingers or sewing up my own leg. That's my reality. Everyday I go to work and listen to the cartilage in my knee CRUNCH when I climb a ladder, and the only thing I can do is pray it holds out for just a couple more years. Everyday, I am one misstep away from bankruptcy.

I've been living with a degenerating knee injury for YEARS because I can't afford to do a god damn thing about it, and you think having to wait in a Doctor's office for free treatment is something I care about? If I could schedule a simple arthroscopy, free of charge but it's going to have to be in September, do you honestly think I'm going to say "no, I'd rather wait until arthritis completely debilitates me and I can no longer work?"

Come live in our world for a while, Doctor, then talk to me about "wait-time".

Thanks Michael.

MM: I will pass this along to him the next time I see him. Please hang in there... the time for real change has come.

Patricia in Exton, PA: Michael, I have been spreading the slogan "Move from me to we" wherever I can including my congressional reps. Why do you think Gupta does not get it?

MM: I can't begin to imagine what Doctor Gupta begins to get or doesn't get. One thing's clear - he doesn't get his own facts straight. It seems that the things he said, he kept harping on how horrible it would be if medical care was free in this country. As a doctor and correspondent for CNN, I'm sure he does quite well. I don't understand why it bothered him so much, that those who do far less well than he does would get a break.

Theresa in Stone Ridge, NY: Hi Mike, love your work since TV Nation.

As a former customer service representative with United Health Care, I was quite astonished at their "Too bad, So sad" mentality when turning down claims. And yes, that was a quote I heard quite frequently from the smirking mouths of those in charge. I feel you've been more patriotic, more humane, more resolute (to use Bush's one word) than any political or religious leader we have today. Thank you for all you've done and continue to do.

My question: Do you feel your Christian upbringing has played a role in the issues you've attempted to shine a light on?

MM: I haven't forgotten the lessons I learned when I was young...that we will be judged by how we treat the least among us and that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. I try to live my life by these lessons and I hope it comes through in my filmmaking.

realPatriotsQuestion: It looked like Dr. Gupta was grasping at straws. Looking for any excuse to be able to say that Moore "fudged" any fact. Why would Moore use BBC statistics when he could use governmental statistics?

MM: I did not use BBC statistics when I said Cuba's health care spending per capita was$251. I used statistics from the United Nations, which are posted on my website and are also viewable here.

R. and M. B. in Milwaukee, WI: We have have been married for nearly 27 years and until 2006, we'd never submitted an insurance claim more complicated than health maintenance checkups, two normal live births, orthodontia, dental checks/cleanings and monthly hypertension medication refills (beginning in 1997). Then last year it all hit the fan... three hospitalizations, two ambulance transports, intensive mental health care for one of our children, chronic debilitating (but not life-threatening) illnesses (3 of them), and, depressingly, the list goes on. We make a decent living (higher than the average per capita) and were prudent with savings and college investments for our kids, yet these past two years have nearly done us in
financially.

So yah, with our eyes wide open, we stand with you 100%. Something has to give, and soon. But how to go about it? How do you see this country converting from our current, failed health care system to universal coverage? And where to start? You don't happen to have a flow-chart on you, do ya? I think visual aids would be helpful in getting the population on-board.

Something colorful and Reagan-y.

Thank you for everything.

MM: No, thank you. And thanks to everyone for signing on. No flow charts yet, but there is more you can do here:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/what-can-i-do/

And here:

http://www.calnurse.org/sicko/

And if you are truly interested in the facts, you can find them here:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/checkup/

But don't be distracted from the big picture which is making sure that every resident of the United States has free, universal health care for life.

Thanks again for checking in. See you soon.

Dr. Gupta's Bias
Dr. Gupta's Bias
by Bill Scher
Posted July 12, 2007


Rachel Sklar and Michael Moore himself have already done a great job taking CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta to task for his biased reporting on SiCKO.

But what was most striking to me during the Moore-Gupta face-off on Larry King Live was when Gupta showed the heart of his bias, a bias against having our government guarantee universal health care.

Gupta says to Moore, "You criticize the government so soundly. But you're willing to hand over one of our most precious commodities, our health care in this country, to the government."

Moore rebutted, "I actually love our government ... It does a great job of administrating Social Security ... the problem is who we've put in power who holds office."

Then in response, Gupta made a completely misleading attack on Medicare:

Michael, one of the best examples of health care, at least some sort of universal health care, would be Medicare. I think you would agree with that.

It's going to go bankrupt by 2019. It's going to be $28 trillion in debt by 2075...would you say that this is going to be still a working system 20 years from now?
Is this some evidence that our government can't be directed to fix our broken health care system? Economist-blogger Dean Baker doesn't think so:

CNN's health care analyst is now telling people that Medicare is going bankrupt. What does this mean?

Medicare's costs are projected to exceed its revenue and drain the surplus from its trust fund in a bit over a decade, but this has been true at several points in the past. Did Congress tell tens of millions of beneficiaries to get lost? No, Congress appropriated the money needed to keep the program going...

...If Dr. Gupta meant to imply that Medicare, as a government program is uniquely inefficient, then he is way off the mark. According to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (Table 13) per beneficiary costs have risen in nominal dollars by 519.5 percent since 1980. By contrast, the cost per enrollee of private insurance has risen by 676.6 percent over this same period.
That gets at the heart of Gupta's bias.

The pressures on Medicare's finances are not the fault of our government, but of skyrocketing health care costs across the board.

Yet Gupta's cherry-picks his facts to attack a government guarantee of universal care, and raise the prospect of dismantling Medicare, just like how conservatives sought to do the same with Social Security.

Health care costs are a major problem, but as Baker notes, "Eliminating Medicare would raise health care costs, not lower them."

Whereas directing our government to ensure universal health care, as Medicare already does for seniors, can contain costs by pooling risk and maximizing bargaining power.

In the proposed Health Care for America plan -- a Medicare-style public plan for those under 65 which would compete with private insurance -- policy architect Jacob Hacker writes:

Because Medicare and the Health Care for America Plan would bargain jointly for lower prices and join forces to improve quality, they would have enormous combined leverage to hold down costs. Cross-national evidence and the historical experience of Medicare show conclusively that concentrated purchasing power is by far the most effective means by which to restrain the price of medical services...

...Other nations spend much less for the same medical services than we do because their insurance systems bargain for lower prices. And though Medicare covers less than a seventh of the U.S. population, it has still controlled costs substantially better than the private sector, especially since the introduction of payment controls in the mid-1980s.
When was the last time you saw a mainstream media report that merely raised the possibility that our government's Medicare plan does a better job at containing costs than private insurance companies?

There is one thing said by Gupta that I have no disagreement with: "It makes it very hard to advance the argument if you're not getting the numbers right."
---------------------------------------

A slightly different version on this post originally appeared at the Campaign for America's Future blog.

Today, Michael Moore will be live on Countdown with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC at 8:00 PM (EST). If you forget to set your alarm clock, it will be on again at midnight (also EST). -- from Michael Moore

An Open Letter to CNN from Michael Moore
An Open Letter to CNN from Michael Moore
7/14/07

Dear CNN,

Well, the week is over -- and still no apology, no retraction, no correction of your glaring mistakes.

I bet you thought my dust-up with Wolf Blitzer was just a cool ratings coup, that you really wouldn't have to correct the false statements you made about "Sicko." I bet you thought I was just going to go quietly away.

Think again. I'm about to become your worst nightmare. 'Cause I ain't ever going away. Not until you set the record straight, and apologize to your viewers. "The Most Trusted Name in News?" I think it's safe to say you can retire that slogan.

You have an occasional segment called "Keeping Them Honest." But who keeps you honest? After what the public saw with your report on "Sicko," and how many inaccuracies that report contained, how can anyone believe anything you say on your network? In the old days, before the Internet, you could get away with it. Your victims had no way to set the record straight, to show the viewers how you had misrepresented the truth. But now, we can post the truth -- and back it up with evidence and facts -- on the web, for all to see. And boy, judging from the mail both you and I have been receiving, the evidence I have posted on my site about your "Sicko" piece has led millions now to question your honesty.

I won't waste your time rehashing your errors. You know what they are. What I want to do is help you come clean. Admit you were wrong. What is the shame in that? We all make mistakes. I know it's hard to admit it when you've screwed up, but it's also liberating and cathartic. It not only makes you a better person, it helps prevent you from screwing up again. Imagine how many people will be drawn to a network that says, "We made a mistake. We're human. We're sorry. We will make mistakes in the future -- but we will always correct them so that you know you can trust us." Now, how hard would that really be?

As you know, I hold no personal animosity against you or any of your staff. You and your parent company have been very good to me over the years. You distributed my first film, "Roger & Me" and you published "Dude, Where's My Country?" Larry King has had me on twice in the last two weeks. I couldn't ask for better treatment.

That's why I was so stunned when you let a doctor who knows a lot about brain surgery -- but apparently very little about public policy -- do a "fact check" story, not on the medical issues in "Sicko," but rather on the economic and political information in the film. Is this why there has been a delay in your apology, because you are trying to get a DOCTOR to say he was wrong? Please tell him not to worry, no one is filing a malpractice claim against him. Dr. Gupta does excellent and compassionate stories on CNN about people's health and how we can take better care of ourselves. But when it came time to discuss universal health care, he rushed together a bunch of sloppy -- and old -- research. When his producer called us about his report the day before it aired, we sent to her, in an email, all the evidence so that he wouldn't make any mistakes on air. He chose to ignore ALL the evidence, and ran with all his falsehoods -- even though he had been given the facts a full day before! How could that happen? And now, for 5 days, I have posted on my website, for all to see, every mistake and error he made.

You, on the other hand, in the face of this overwhelming evidence and a huge public backlash, have chosen to remain silent, probably praying and hoping this will all go away.

Well it isn't. We are now going to start looking into the veracity of other reports you have aired on other topics. Nothing you say now can be believed. In 2002, the New York Times busted you for bringing celebrities on your shows and not telling your viewers they were paid spokespeople for the pharmaceutical companies. You promised never to do it again. But there you were, in 2005, talking to Joe Theismann, on air, as he pushed some drug company-sponsored website on prostate health. You said nothing about about his affiliation with GlaxoSmithKline.

Clearly, no one is keeping you honest, so I guess I'm going to have to do that job, too. $1.5 billion is spent each year by the drug companies on ads on CNN and the other four networks. I'm sure that has nothing to do with any of this. After all, if someone gave me $1.5 billion, I have to admit, I might say a kind word or two about them. Who wouldn't?!

I expect CNN to put this matter to rest. Say you're sorry and correct your story -- like any good journalist would.

Then we can get back to more important things. Like a REAL discussion about our broken health care system. Everything else is a distraction from what really matters.

Yours,
Michael Moore

[email protected]
www.michaelmoore.com

P.S. If you also want to apologize for not doing your job at the start of the Iraq War, I'm sure most Americans would be very happy to accept your apology. You and the other networks were willing partners with Bush, flying flags all over the TV screens and never asking the hard questions that you should have asked. You might have prevented a war. You might have saved the lives of those 3,610 soldiers who are no longer with us. Instead, you blew air kisses at a commander in chief who clearly was making it all up. Millions of us knew that -- why didn't you? I think you did. And, in my opinion, that makes you responsible for this war. Instead of doing the job the founding fathers wanted you to do -- keeping those in power honest (that's why they made it the FIRST amendment) -- you and much of the media went on the attack against the few public figures like myself who dared to question the nightmare we were about to enter. You've never thanked me or the Dixie Chicks or Al Gore for doing your job for you. That's OK. Just tell the truth from this point on.

CNN Throws in Towel, Admits to Two Errors
CNN Throws in Towel, Admits to Two Errors, and States That All 'Sicko' Facts Are True to Their Source (or something like that)... Moore Realizes All This is Huge Distraction and Then Spends More Precious Time Thanking Paris Hilton for Seeing 'Sicko'... Meanwhile, More than 300 Americans Die Because They Had No Health Insurance During the 8-Day Gupta-Moore War...

July 17th, 2007

Friends,

The mighty CNN, in a lengthy and sad online defense of their woe-begotten 'Sicko' story of last Monday, has admitted that they did indeed fudge at least two of the facts in their coverage of my film and have apologized for it:

1. Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN: "To be clear, I got a number wrong in my original report, substituting the number 25, instead of 251." -- My Conversation with Michael Moore, July 11th, 2007; and

2. CNN: "Moore is correct. Paul Keckley left Vanderbilt in late 2006." -- CNN's Response to Michael Moore, July 15th, 2007.

Furthermore, CNN confirmed that all of our statistics in "Sicko" are the correct numbers from the sources we cited. Although CNN still prefers to use older World Health Organization statistics, we will stick to using this year's Bush administration stats and more recent U.N. data. (In "Sicko," we consistently use only U.N. Human Development Statistics unless it's for studies they don't do or have recent numbers for.) CNN did apologize for these two factual errors, but no apology seems to be coming for the rest of their errors. These days, to get the mainstream media to admit they were wrong is rare; to get them to admit it twice, as they have with "Sicko," I guess should be considered a whopping victory. Will they eventually apologize for the rest, or for their reporting on the war? Will the Cubs win the World Series this year?

So the truce has been signed, the peace pipe has been smoked. And the public is left with a much more cautious and wary eye when it comes to CNN. To be fair, this is what happens when you have to grind out "news" 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with a staff you have shrunk through layoffs over the years (like all the broadcast networks have done). You end up rushed and having interns do your research. You have robots replace live camera operators. And, if you're CNN, you are constantly dodging the accusation that you are "too liberal." So when you do a piece on someone like me, you have to make sure you add superfluous and standard ad hominems attacking me simply to prove that you are NOT too liberal. I get it.

Until the last month or so, I have not appeared on a single national TV show for nearly 2 and 1/2 years. After the attacks I had to endure three years ago, from a media intent on questioning my patriotism because I dared to speak out against the war when none in the media would, I decided I had had enough and would simply concentrate on making my next film. I had no desire to participate in networks that were complicit in the war because of their refusal the challenge the commander in chief.

I have to admit, though, I do feel kinda bad taking it all out on Wolf Blitzer. It's not like he's the official representative of the mainstream media. I mean, he's from Buffalo, for crying out loud! He said to me at the end of the show last week to please come back on "anytime you want." I will take him up on that offer and appear again with him tomorrow (Wednesday). I'm not expecting a dozen roses or make-up sex -- I only want a promise that there will be no more distorted distractions so we can have a decent discussion about the REAL issues like why 18,000 Americans die every year because they don't have a health insurance card. More than 300 of them died this week. As Ehrlichman said to Nixon in "Sicko": "The less care they give 'em, the more money they (the insurance companies) make."

THAT'S the only thing we should be talking about. How profit and greed are killing our fellow Americans. How profit and private insurance have to be removed from our health care system. CNN should join me in asking why our 9/11 rescue workers aren't receiving medical care. Somebody should send a crew to Canada to find out why they live longer than we do, and why no Canadian has ever gone bankrupt because of medical bills. And all of the media should start saying how much it costs to go to a doctor in these other top industrialized countries: Nothing. Zip. It's FREE. Don't patronize Americans by saying, "Well, it's not free -- they pay for it with taxes!" Yes, we know that. Just like we know that we drive down a city street for FREE -- even though we paid for that street with our taxes. The street is FREE, the book at the library is FREE, if your house catches on fire, the fire department will come and put it out for FREE, and if someone snatches your purse, the police officer will chase down the culprit and bring your purse back to you -- AND HE WON'T CHARGE YOU A DIME FROM THAT PURSE!

These are all free services, collectively socialized and paid for with our tax dollars. To argue that health care -- a life and death issue for many -- should not be considered in the same league is ludicrous and archaic. And trust me, once you add up what you pay for out-of-pocket in premiums, deductibles, co-pays, overpriced medicines, and treatments that aren't covered (not to mention all the other things we pay for like college education, day care and other services that many countries provide for at little or no cost), we, as Americans, are paying far more than the Canadians or Brits or French are paying in taxes. We just don't call these things taxes, but that's exactly what they are.

See you all when I'm back on CNN tomorrow -- where the discussion will be not be about whose statistics are right, but rather about the guy without insurance who died while I was writing this letter.

Yours,
Michael Moore
[email protected]
www.michaelmoore.com

P.S. Oh... I forgot to tell you about Paris Hilton. Apparently cooped up for too long at home since getting out of jail, she decided to head out for a night on the town. But where does she go? Clubbing? Cruising down the Strip? No! She and her sister decide to go see "Sicko." Now THAT'S news! So, no more bad words about Paris Hilton!

He who laughs last, laughs best. Is FOX just trying to ignore this film? Not that nearly all the ominous predictions in "F 9/ll" are now in effect?